Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
where in you flip off the safety, andthe (lowered) hammer is flung back to full cock. I think it's Laughridge, of cylinder and slide shop. This would let the OAL of a pocketed 1911 be 6.5", if you didn't have a ducktail tang.

The cocked hammer in the pocket scares many, and the use of a quality, alloy framed 1911 would fix the worry about Star parts durability and replacement. It would also let you use the 9x26 Win rd, and have almost 700 ft lbs on tap, as vs 600 ft lbs. 65 grs at 2200 fps, instead of 55 grs.

By using an aluminum grip safety and doing a Detonics slash of the slide, the wt could be brought down to 21 ozs, as vs 19 ozs for the Star. Recoil would be pretty severe, tho, and I doubt that you could get a full handgrip on the butt, and still have a size that would slip out of the pocket handily. Also, it would be difficult to mount a Ruger 22 type mag catch on the butt, as was done with the Star, because of the mainspring housing's removing so much of the frame-metal at that point. So not only would you have more recoil, you'd have a lower grasp on the gun, and fewer fingers on the butt. It would be an interesting project, tho.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,279 Posts
andy says: "Somebody's offering a conversionfor 1911 where in you flip off the safety, andthe (lowered) hammer is flung back to full cock. I think it's Laughridge, of cylinder and slide shop. This would let the OAL of a pocketed 1911 be 6.5", if you didn't have a ducktail tang."

I've seen that conversion offered though I don't remember who offered it either. The question is, why do you think a mere safety conversion would reduce OAL to 6.5" (without the ducktail tang). This does not compute.

Next andy says, "Also, it would be difficult to mount a Ruger 22 type mag catch on the butt, as was done with the Star."

Again, this makes no sense. The mag release on the 1911 is totally ergonomic and desirable and it adds nothing to the size or weight of the weapon. The heel release is workable but much less user friendly.

Would you care to explain?

RIKA
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,016 Posts
I ran across a Detonics with this conversion on it back in the late 80's or early 90's at a gunshow in Houston or Austin. It was "neat", but I passed on it, as I didn't know who did the work or how well. If it was cylinder & slide, I should have bought it.

The little combatmaster version, in .38 super; and of course there's been many times since that I'd wished I'd picked it up. But of course, at the time, I was stuck in my ".45 acp & 5.56 only" mode. (Dumbass... :headbang: )


RIKA - The "heel" release is preferable on a pocket pistol IMO, as it's basically impossible to release accidentally. When I bought my first P32, I had to slightly reduce the protrusion of the mag release, as it would too often get bumped on something and released. Bear in mind, I carry mine in my left front pocket, which makes the release more exposed to "the world" than it would be in the right, and I'm just the right height for it to hit on the edge of our kitchen counter. In the right hand pocket, it probably wouldn't be as much of an issue, but (again, IMO), the heel release would still be preferable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
It's not just the accidental release of the mag that's the issue, it's the abiltiy to get the hand HIGHER on the gun, using all fingers to help with recoil. In order to undercut the trigger guard as much as possible, you have to dispose of the 1911 style mag catch. The difference is having the little finger on the front strap, or not. If you can't handle the problem with 7 rds of 9x23 Split Nose, then you need a LOT more than a pocket pistol (than just a few more rds in the mag of said pocket pistol) you need grenades, an autorifle, body armor, and BUDDIES.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
If one did this undercutting, tho, and moved the hand up on the gun, one would need the ducktail tang, in order to keep the hand from getting into the path of the slide, when grab the gun and fire in a big hurry. That would make the gun .5" longer than the chopped Star 356TSW, which would probably take it out of the running for most pockets.

It'd be $900 in the 9x23 gun, Laughridge conversion, and spare mags, to start with, most likely, and then another $100 in the luminous sights. As vs $170 in the Star and mags. The $700 diff in startup costs is enough to keep most guys out of the "finding out for myself" stage of things. Not having to weld on the frame tang, nor convert the firing pin retainer to 1911 style, nor move the mag catch to the butt would save a lot of work, tho. So the end result could probably be bought for $2000, instead of paying $3000 for a fully worked over Star 356 TSW, with shortened spare mags and spare 9x19 barrels for each.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top